Discussing the most relevant "sequels" or "reminders" of 9/11. The so-called "War On Terror" is a global scam finalized to manipulate this world's population with crass fear-mongering tactics designed to scare you shitless.

beforewedie wrote:is there any way to possible write in a way where you can respect other people for what they believe?

Goodness, you say you've read much of the Oslo thread, but you still don't have a clue about this forum. Nobody cares what you think or believe about anything - including what you think or believe about us. Face it, for the most part we don't care what each other thinks or believes about anything, either. Each of us trusts what our own own eyes and the posted evidence and analyses tells us.

We care about the validity of evidence posted here that everyone can analyze for himself. You think we're wrong in one of our basic conclusions? By all means, go ahead and prove your conclusions.

You know what, you're in way over your head here. You are out of your league.

Boy, with all the dozens of deaths from this sad terror event in Oslo, and the 3,000 deaths on 9/11, you folks are either acting in bad faith or are just plain dumb when you say these events never happened and no one died. What are you, stupid? Of course it happened. For it to have been faked would require the involvement of so many people someone would have cracked. Groups of conspirators always include stool pigeons. Face it guys, someone would have talked by now.

Or so they say. Now let's come back down to planet earth and return to reality.

Someone Would Have Talked? Someone Would Be Crazy

Would covert operatives whose work involves subverting democratic governments abroad—including violent coups such as the one that brought down Chilean President Salvador Allende in 1973—hesitate when ordered to participate in comparable activities at home?

We’re constantly told that no such thing could happen in the good ole USA (certainly not in the deaths of JFK, RFK, MLK, for example), if for no other reason than that it is impossible to keep such plots secret.

Or, in the common parlance: “Someone would have talked.”

The logic goes: since no one has come forward to describe their role in such plots, therefore no plot has existed.

In fact, nothing could be further from the truth. People are coming forward all the time to provide, if not the whole story, crucial bits and pieces that together would lead us to awareness of a variety of covert doings, some clearly nefarious.[FB - Yea, people like us on this forum!] For example, scores, perhaps hundreds of credible eyewitnesses have cast doubt on the official “lone kook” scenario that is a staple of every domestic assassination.

But these whistleblowers are quickly discredited, suppressed, or worse. From time to time people even come out of the national security establishment to testify to such wrongdoing, but they almost always pay a heavy price –which of course discourages others from bearing witness.…The bottom line here is that public servants can go to jail for trying to inform the public about the truth of what their government does—and, bizarrely, for lying to the government by falsely promising to lie about government secrets while actually telling the truth about what they had seen from the inside.

As for “someone would have talked”……baloney. Almost nobody talks. And for good reason. [FB - No kidding - they might get a bullet in the head - or be 'suicided', like Ken Lay, David Kelly, Bruce Ivins, and so on.]

[ADMINS: I think we've all had quite enough of this foolish canard. In the future, every single new member who wastes our time with "someone would have talked" should be banned immediately. Further, please consider copying this post to a place that every new member is likely to see before his first post, and also in the 9/11 threads.]

Or so they say. Now let's come back down to planet earth and return to reality.

The album Down To Earth by Rainbow was released right before I went away to college my freshman year, so it has always meant a lot to me. Since the album title fits this quote, I thought I'd post my fave song from it. Nice song title given our subject matter - maybe we're the folks with the eyes that actually see the truth. Ha!

full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ziuqk8dZwrM

I see the innocent victims ...Evil moves, evil ways Without seeing at all You ain't got a lot to say Judging by the things you do If only you could feel the tears and pain In the eyes of the world Dust to dust by the million Broken dreams in the ground

I had to laugh when watching the Breivik trial - as they revealed just where Mrs. NERSNAES sustained her alarming 'spike-in-forehead' wound:

Yes, Line Nersnaes was apparently impaled by the spike on the 11th floor of the bombed government buiding. That was SOME bomb!

I then bumped into an odd video glitch - making main prosecutor Svein Holden look even more alien-ish than he already looks...

Some may say the above could just be some un-sinister, random video artifact. However, it's getting rather odd/and annoying to keep bumping into inexplicable 'video artifacts' in connection to the Breivik case... Such as this one that I found yesterday (see previous page of this thread):

^agree 100% superb analysis. I also wonder if 'flash' images taken through the incomplete glass screen should look the same as those unimpeded ones taken to the side? Also, would the glass screen not present a flash-back anti-photographic effect to those taking shots from that angle? Note also the contemporary psychology in the whole overall composition of this image...all pictures "have to be taken from behind", Brevick is separated from the victim parents and witnesses, but intimately viewable by you, the gullible and entrusted viewer/consumer. That essential imagery validation element, images of people filming and photographing 'images' puts you in the suggestible state of undeniable acceptance of the core veracity of the synthetic focus of attention.

Great work Kentrailer. What do we make of the canary-yellow simulant in centre screen, with sunglasses upon a yellow beanie-hat? I noted the immovable spectator comments earlier, and Simon's poltergeist chair-back... this court case, for both prosecution and defence, is looking like it could fall apart quite soon...a pity that there's no true higher court within which this whole charade can be taken to trial